About this blog

My name is Bill Hirt and I'm a candidate to be a Representative from the 48th district in the Washington State legislature. My candidacy stems from concern the legislature is not properly overseeing the WSDOT and Sound Transit East Link light rail program. I believe East Link will be a disaster for the entire eastside. ST will spend 5-6 billion on a transportation project that will increase, not decrease cross-lake congestion, violates federal environmental laws, devastates a beautiful part of residential Bellevue, creates havoc in Bellevue's central business district, and does absolutely nothing to alleviate congestion on 1-90 and 405. The only winners with East Link are the Associated Builders and Contractors of Western Washington and their labor unions.

This blog is an attempt to get more public awareness of these concerns. Many of the articles are from 3 years of failed efforts to persuade the Bellevue City Council, King County Council, east side legislators, media, and other organizations to stop this debacle. I have no illusions about being elected. My hope is voters from throughout the east side will read of my candidacy and visit this Web site. If they don't find them persuasive I know at least I tried.

Wednesday, October 9, 2013

Responsible FHWA Oversight Could Stop East Link

The Federal Highway Administration
has the ultimate responsibility for determining whether Sound Transit can
replace the two center roadway lanes on I-90 Bridge with light rail. Their decision would presumably be
predicated on Sound Transit demonstrating light rail operation won’t damage the
I-90 Bridge and that the fourth lanes they add to the outer roadways will
provide adequate capacity to accommodate all cross-lake vehicles.

In September 2005
the WSDOT attempted to verify “floating-bridge/light rail compatibility” using
flat bed trucks to simulate light rail cars. They concluded the bridge can be structurally retrofitted to carry the loads
associated with the light rail system.The Sound Transit 2008 DEIS dealt with the capacity issue with promises “Travel
times across I-90 for vehicles and trucks would also improve or remain similar
with East Link.

The 10/1/13 post
details how both the FHWA and the Legislative Joint Transportation Committee concluded
additional testing was needed to demonstrate “floating bridge/light rail”
compatibility.Five years after
being advised of these concerns WSDO/ST is finally having additional testing
done at the Transportation Technology Center in Pueblo, Colo. Apparently
it will take until the end of the year to complete.The FHWA will presumably use its “Oversight Responsibility”
to determine whether the results verify the bridge can be “retrofitted” to withstand
the loads associated with the four 74-ton light rail cars ST has promised for
East Link operation.

The FHWA document, “ I-90 Two-Way Transit
and HOV Operations Project, Record of Decision, September 2004” dealt
with the bridge capacity issue. It
included the following “Decision” regarding Federal Highway Administration’s
approval of the R-8A Alternative;

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) concurs
with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and Sound
Transit in the designation of Alternative R8-A as the selected alternative for
the I-90 Two-way Transit and HOV Operations Project in Bellevue, Mercer Island
and Seattle King County Washington.

However, the Alternative R8-A Alternative the FHWA concurred
with in that document is not the R8-A Alternative WSDOT/ST has chosen for East
Link.The FHWA R-8A Alternative is
defined on page 9 of the document.

Alternative R-8A will provide HOV lanes on the outer
roadways. It will retain the existing reversible operations on the center
roadway, with both lanes operating in the same direction, westbound in the AM
and eastbound in the PM. SOVs will only be allowed to use the center roadway
between Rainier Avenue in Seattle and Island Crest Way on Mercer Island. The
center and outer roadway HOV lanes will likely operate with a 2 + occupants per
vehicle restriction

Thus, contrary to WSDOT/ST claims the center roadway could
be used for light rail, it’s clear the R8-A configuration the FHWA approved
required the center roadway be used for vehicles. The FHWA surely has
an “Oversight Responsibility” to insist ST demonstrate their modified outer
roadway has the needed capacity.Doing so would require ST to expedite adding the 4th lane and
temporarily close off the center roadway.

In conclusion, assuring a floating bridge can support light rail operation is a "necessary" but not "sufficient" reason for the FHWA to allow light rail on I-90. Responsible "Approval" requires they insist ST demonstrate the modified outer roadway has the needed capacity. ST
current plans to delay completing the 4th lane until 2016 undoubtedly reflect
concerns tests will show it won’t provide needed capacity. (Just one of the reasons ST continues to delay a simple bridge modification that would reduce congestion for all cross-lake commuters.) Whether the FHWA will force ST to conduct tests they "fear" would prevent them from installing light rail on center roadway remains to be seen.

About Me

My last elective position was class president for 25 “class of ’57” seniors in Armstrong, Iowa. I received an MS in engineering at ISU, worked at Boeing for 36 years before retiring in 1998. My wife and I moved into our current home in Bellevue in 1967 where we raised two daughters. Three years of unsuccessful attempts to persuade BCC to block EL are available on “extended session” meeting minutes. Copies of many were sent to all the media outlets, legislators, and others to no avail. I’m hoping this Web site will convince east side residents to query their own legislators.